Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues

2012-07-24 Thread steve
Hi Michael, from what I have noticed, bitcoin blockchain download/verfication all happens in 1 thread. (so multicores doesnt really help) That said, I have never tried on an ssd. What I do have is 6 SATA 6gbs configed as RAID0 Drives. 32gb of ram. ubuntu 64 (yeah I know), this runs upto 16 VM's

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
> The Satoshi client uses a pure reentrant mutexes model As you presumably already know, the reference client doesn't attempt to parallelise most operations at all. Chain download is entirely single threaded. -- Live Secu

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering block version number use

2012-07-24 Thread Peter Vessenes
I think it would be great to have more nonce space with less merkle calculation; keeping track of all possible versions of a block already takes real RAM, real computation. Being able to change one bit in the header and send out a new block for checking would ease our pool server work by a real amo

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Scalability issues

2012-07-24 Thread Michael Grønager
Hi Steve, 45-90 minutes - note that its numbers from March/April, so a bit longer today, but far, far away from the 12 hours. I am using libcoin and the bitcoind build based on this. Libcoin is based on the Satoshi client, but refactured to use an async concurrency model. I also did a minor t

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering block version number use

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
My point is that stuffing nonces into whatever spaces we can find to eke out a bit more scalability in pools seems like a very short term fix with potentially very long term consequences. Although it may sound harsh, if your pool is struggling to keep up with calculating merkle roots (which is che

Re: [Bitcoin-development] New P2P commands for diagnostics, SPV clients

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
> Really lightweight clients (like Bitcoincard), clients with shared > private keys (electrum-style), or brainwallets - will ask the following > question quite often to "supernodes": Given my public keys/addresses, > what is the list of unspent outputs. i think it would make sense to > include such

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Reconsidering block version number use

2012-07-24 Thread Mike Hearn
> That'd be 7 bytes of nonce in the block header, which is > 72,057,594,037,927,936 ~ 72 petahashes = 72,000 terahashes > > So: the changes for version 2 blocks would be "has height in the > coinbase, and has a 1-byte version number with a 3-byte extranonce." I don't understand why more nonce b